Flourishing despite Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): Findings from a Nationally Representative Survey of Canadians Aged 50 and Older
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a leading cause of mortality and is often associated with serious disability and depression. Little is known about the characteristics of those who are in complete mental health (CMH) despite having COPD. This study’s objectives are to: (1) estimate the prevalence and odds of absence of psychiatric disorders (APD) and CMH among older adults that reported having COPD, compared to their peers that did not; (2) identify factors associated with APD and with CMH. Bivariate and logistic regression analyses were conducted using the nationally representative Canadian Community Health Survey—Mental Health. The results indicate that there was a significantly (p < 0.001) lower prevalence of APD (86.7% vs. 95.0%) and CMH (66.7% vs. 77.0%) among older adults aged 50+ with COPD (n = 703) compared to those without COPD (n = 10,189). Half of the sample was female (50.5%) and the majority of whom were under age 70 (62.5%). Factors significantly (p < 0.05) associated with higher odds of APD and of CMH among older adults with COPD include being married, having a confidant, being physically active, and having no lifetime history of major depressive disorder or generalized anxiety disorder. For every additional adverse childhood experience, the odds of APD declined by 31%. The majority of those with COPD are mentally flourishing despite having this disabling and life-threatening disorder. These findings underline the importance of targeted interventions and outreach to those most vulnerable to poorer mental health outcomes including the socially isolated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".